Age, Biography and Wiki

Christian Jambet was born on 23 April, 1949 in Algeria, is a French philosopher and Islamologist. Discover Christian Jambet's Biography, Age, Height, Physical Stats, Dating/Affairs, Family and career updates. Learn How rich is he in this year and how he spends money? Also learn how he earned most of networth at the age of 74 years old?

Popular As N/A
Occupation N/A
Age 74 years old
Zodiac Sign Taurus
Born 23 April, 1949
Birthday 23 April
Birthplace N/A
Nationality Algeria

We recommend you to check the complete list of Famous People born on 23 April. He is a member of famous philosopher with the age 74 years old group.

Christian Jambet Height, Weight & Measurements

At 74 years old, Christian Jambet height not available right now. We will update Christian Jambet's Height, weight, Body Measurements, Eye Color, Hair Color, Shoe & Dress size soon as possible.

Physical Status
Height Not Available
Weight Not Available
Body Measurements Not Available
Eye Color Not Available
Hair Color Not Available

Dating & Relationship status

He is currently single. He is not dating anyone. We don't have much information about He's past relationship and any previous engaged. According to our Database, He has no children.

Family
Parents Not Available
Wife Not Available
Sibling Not Available
Children Not Available

Christian Jambet Net Worth

His net worth has been growing significantly in 2023-2024. So, how much is Christian Jambet worth at the age of 74 years old? Christian Jambet’s income source is mostly from being a successful philosopher. He is from Algeria. We have estimated Christian Jambet's net worth, money, salary, income, and assets.

Net Worth in 2024 $1 Million - $5 Million
Salary in 2024 Under Review
Net Worth in 2023 Pending
Salary in 2023 Under Review
House Not Available
Cars Not Available
Source of Income philosopher

Christian Jambet Social Network

Instagram
Linkedin
Twitter
Facebook
Wikipedia
Imdb

Timeline

1949

Christian Jambet (born 23 April 1949, Algiers, French Algeria) is a French philosopher and Islamologist.

He was a student of Henry Corbin.

His work has engaged with Nizari Isma'ilism and has explored the thought of Avicenna, Mulla Sadra, and Nasir al-Din al-Tusi among others.

In his treatment of these thinkers, he notes the lasting influence of figures associated with Neoplatonism such as Plotinus and Proclus(cf Theology of Aristotle).

The impact of Avicenna upon Jacques Lacan is mentioned in Chapter 3 The Avicennian Moment of The Act of Being: The Philosophy of Revelation in Mullā Sadrā, pg 143:

"...Avicenna's definitions of the possible, the impossible, and the necessary, which are for him the only three 'states' of the existent as existent. He says that it is difficult to define these three modailities and that the ancients, from whom we inherit these terms, did not escape the vicious circle. Indeed, when they wanted to define the possible, they included in its definition either the impossible or the necessary. And when they wanted to define the impossible, they included in its definition either the necessary or the possible.

The three modalities form, as it were, three circles that implicate one another and are all bound together (in a manner that is somewhat analogous to the weaving together of the real, the symbolic, and the imaginary in the Lacanian schema).

It is impossible to separate one of the modalities from the others without dissolving all three of them into inconsistency.

Just as Lacan grants a certain primacy to the real among the three circles, Avicenna considers the necessary dimension of being 'the one that must be represented as primary.' This comparison of the two schemata is not arbitrary.

In his way, Lacan is a distant heir to Avicenna.

But he is a very unfaithful heir, and willfully so: the real, which in a certain sense has primacy over the symbolic and the imaginary, is more analogous to the impossible than to the necessary.

In the Lacanian schema, the real is analogous to the impossible, the symbolic to the necessary, and the imaginary to the possible.

Giving priority to the circle of the real over the two other circles involves a decision concerning being that is opposed to Avicenna's decision(a decision that governs all of Western ontology up to Leibniz and Hegel).

It is an attempt to put an end to the Avicennian moment I am outlining here.

I say this in order to emphasize Avicenna's decision, to underline its tremendous importance.

For Avicenna, the necessary is first.

It is what we must begin with..."

Critique of Hegel

This is the supreme task of a counter-phenomenology.

The problem is to sustain within logic the rights of that which is ‘non-totalizable’ (LO: 108).

Jambet formulates this idea more Lacanianly: Hegelian dialectic secretes a flaw, the real.

It is precisely that flaw that one needs to think within historical reason.